wake

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that the tool synthesizes input (a tap plus a home-key press), which is real value, but it never says what happens if the screen is already on, whether the home press navigates away from the current app, or what a failure/timeout looks like.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single compact sentence with the purpose front-loaded and zero filler. The mechanism detail in the parenthesis earns its place, though the phrasing is terse enough to be slightly cryptic.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a device-mutating composite action with four parameters at 25% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description leaves major gaps: parameter behavior, idempotency (safe to call when awake?), and timing/return semantics are all unaddressed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 25% — only 'settle' is documented — and the description explains none of the four parameters. The three timing parameters (timeout, stable_for, wait_change) are undocumented in both the schema and the description, leaving an agent to guess at the semantics of a timing-sensitive control call.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Wake the display') and even names the underlying mechanisms ('a tap and then the home key'), which lets an agent distinguish this composite action from the raw siblings tap, key, and home_screen. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings as alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The parenthetical 'it turns off after boot' implies the trigger context (use immediately after boot when the screen is dark), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no statement about calling it when the display is already awake, and no pointers to the tap/key siblings as fallbacks.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.